21–30 of 436 posts
> The amount of unpaid taxes to be recovered by the Irish authorities would also be reduced if the US authorities were to require Apple to pay larger amounts of money to their US parent company for this period to finance research and development efforts.
I wonder how much of the 14B could be offset by this? I suppose there's a chance that it all might be.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Jeez, an effective tax rate on profits in Ireland of 0.005% is pretty inexcusable.
Why? 0% tax on profits would seem fair and reasonable. (There's lots of stuff that's not taxed. Eg not a lot of people complain about not taxing capital gains of home owner/occupiers.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Jeez, an effective tax rate on profits in Ireland of 0.005% is pretty inexcusable.
Why? 0% tax on profits would seem fair and reasonable. (There's lots of stuff that's not taxed. Eg not a lot of people complain about not taxing capital gains of home owner/occupiers.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Jeez, an effective tax rate on profits in Ireland of 0.005% is pretty inexcusable.
Why? 0% tax on profits would seem fair and reasonable. (There's lots of stuff that's not taxed. Eg not a lot of people complain about not taxing capital gains of home owner/occupiers.)
$14.5bn to be recovered.
It's great that there is a supra-national authority forcing the states to cooperate on getting multinationals to pay reasonable taxes, because it wouldn't happen otherwise.
Can someone clarify where this money will eventually end up (assuming it's paid)? The article says that it will be paid back to Ireland, yet it looks like Ireland was somewhat complicit in allowing this fraud to continue for so long? ' Is this just how it works, money goes to Ireland, and then recovered by Europe?
The EU has now determined this was an illegal tax benefit provided by Ireland, so Ireland must now collect the tax as if it had done so at the time. There is no penalty but interest must be paid.
This is not your normal run of the mill tax avoidance case (or a fraud as you've mentioned) although it appears to look the same. This was Apple benefiting from decisions taken by Ireland that Ireland should not have made.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Jeez, an effective tax rate on profits in Ireland of 0.005% is pretty inexcusable.
Why? 0% tax on profits would seem fair and reasonable. (There's lots of stuff that's not taxed. Eg not a lot of people complain about not taxing capital gains of home owner/occupiers.)
If you want to completely reform our taxation system, sure, whatever. But that doesn't impact Apple's liability under the current one.
All of that will go back to Ireland's national debt repayments under EU rules from what I understand, which includes large repayments due to the EU for the recent loans provided to Ireland for propping up banks, so really EU is collecting this money by proxy of Ireland. Interesting play.
Good. Read how Tim Cook publicly considers Nobel economist Joeseph Stiglitz as a one who do not know what he (Stiglitz) is talking about. Eye opening. Excerpts from: http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/business/wp/2016/08/13/2016... Q: What do you say in response to Nobel economist Joseph Stiglitz’s comments on Bloomberg [television], where he called Apple’s profit reporting in Ireland a “fraud”? Tim Cooks answer: I did…
Apple followed the law. End of story. The issue is that the EU found that the law was illegal under state aid rules.